Real judgements, distilled
Court judgements broken down into the case type, how the decision played out, and the lesson worth remembering, with the full judgement available as a PDF.
Civil Appeal · 2026 INSC 1094
An older qualification must still satisfy the eligibility rules governing the appointment sought. Here, the certificate's early date did not secure reinstatement, and rejection of eligibility should not be confused with a conclusive finding that the certificate was forged.
Civil Appeal · 2026 INSC 1095
A party benefiting from a conditional stay must meet its deposit requirement or face enforcement. The additional ₹15 crore deposit secures the pending dispute; it does not settle the land's final compensation or amount to an immediate payment to the landowners.
Criminal Appeal · 2026 INSC 1093
An alleged attempt to kill does not become a lesser offence simply because the victim avoided a fatal injury. Restoring this charge means the accusation must be tried; it does not establish that the accused is guilty.
Civil Appeal · 2026 INSC 1090
For the assessment in this case, assistance reducing ordinary manufacturing costs was taxable even though the government wanted to encourage industry. The purpose and actual operation of the particular subsidy mattered more than its general development label.
Criminal Appeal · 2026 INSC 1091
Proof that someone caused a serious injury does not by itself prove the additional ingredients of robbery. A court can substitute a lesser offence supported by the evidence; the sentencing reduction here depended on Appa's particular circumstances.
Special Leave Petition (Civil) · 2026 INSC 1092
Someone challenging an election must ensure that the personal-presentation requirement is met and can be proved. Merely entering the court building does not establish compliance, and a filing defect can end the challenge before the election allegations are examined.
Civil Appeal · 2026 INSC 1088
An employee who retires on 30 June may be entitled to the increment that falls due on 1 July after completing a year of service. Authorities that delay paying the amounts due must pay interest after the deadline set by the court.
Civil Appeal · 2026 INSC 1089
Recruitment must follow the qualifications stated in the advertisement and the governing Recruitment Rules. A court will not override a merit-based eligibility decision made under those rules merely because the candidate concerned was higher in the written test.
Writ Petition (Criminal) · 2026:DHC:8797
A person who occupied property only because of employment has no independent right to remain once the employment and decree end. Even when a petition fails, courts can make practical arrangements to let a person recover personal belongings.
14543 more judgements for members
You're seeing the newest cases. Log in — it's free — to keep scrolling, search by name or judge, and filter by court or legal area.
Log in to see moreThe respondent (plaintiff), who had let the appellant occupy her property on a licence basis, sued for its return. The appellant, her brother-in-law, resisted, claiming the respondent had gifted him the property via a Gift Deed executed in 1970. The respondent denied executing any such deed and said her signature, if genuine, may have been obtained by misrepresentation. The Trial Court, the First Appellate Court, and the High Court all ruled against the appellant, finding the Gift Deed was never properly proved.
Under Section 90 of the Evidence Act, a document that is thirty years old when tendered in evidence can be presumed genuine without separately proving its execution by calling the attesting witnesses. The appellant tried to rely on this presumption, but the Supreme Court found that when he first tendered the Gift Deed in evidence (in his own testimony), it was only about 29 years and 5 months old, short of the thirty-year threshold, so the presumption could not apply. The Court rejected his attempts to recalculate the relevant date (e.g., from a later witness's testimony or the date of the trial court's judgment) and held he had made no independent effort to prove the deed's execution through the ordinary evidentiary route either. The appeal was accordingly dismissed, though without costs.
The thirty-year presumption for old documents under Section 90 of the Evidence Act is measured from the date the document is actually tendered/proved in court, not from registration, trial, or judgment: a few months' shortfall is fatal to the presumption, so a party relying on an old document should ensure it has genuinely crossed thirty years before tendering it, or be ready to prove its execution independently.
